Read here from Greg Bedard. Bedard talks about the back injury to Brad Jones opening up a new-look LB group. He says that the line-up being used from left to right was Matthews, Barnett, Bishop, Chillar. Several curious things about this. One is that Matthews played ROLB last year, rarely if ever playing on the left as far as I remember. And, there is no mention of Hawk. I think these are the 4 best LBs the team has. Of course, I don’t like it that Brad Jones is hurt and I still do believe he has potential at least. But if Chillar gets the chance at OLB, we’ll find that he will be more effective than Jones.
Another curious thing is that Hawk was not part of this group. It appears as though Bishop is finally pushing his way into the conversation here and I’m hopeful this translates into some more playing time this year for the guy.
packergeeks 
August 3, 2010 at 10:25 am |
A commentor on that article made a fantastic point about Matthews…if you get him some practice on the LOLB, he could get to the point where he could come from either side more fluently. Imagine the possibilities of mixing that up with defensive audibles….
I’ll admit, I dont know much about Hawk aside from I think he’s paid too much to do too little, but any issues with putting him on the outside and Bishop/Chillar in the middle with Barnett? That has a potential to be pretty potent.
August 3, 2010 at 10:51 am |
Report this morning out of Minn. – Favre tells Vikings he’s not returning
all I can say is WOO HOO!
August 3, 2010 at 10:53 am |
but on the other hand, I won’t really believe it until he’s not there in NO on Sept. 9
August 3, 2010 at 6:20 pm |
I read the same article yesterday and got the impression the Hawk-less lineup was in passing downs or nickle packages. Implication he is still in there on 1st downs and running situations.
Pretty high pick for a situational LB.
August 3, 2010 at 6:29 pm |
Ted – I think you’re right, I don’t think this new line-up was meant to be a new starting line-up (I’d like it if it were). I think it’s more of a situational package deal – still interesting that Hawk’s PT may be the casualty.
August 3, 2010 at 6:50 pm |
They (reports) keep referring to Chillar’s weight (237 lbs) being light for an outside LB. But I always thought the inside LBs were heavier than the OLBs, as the OLBs had to be more fleet of foot, cover more territory, etc. what gives?
August 3, 2010 at 7:11 pm |
AZ – I think the ideal size for an OLB in a 3-4 is about 245-255 or so. They do need to be quick enough to drop back into coverage (which was part of the knock on Kampman as a 3-4 OLB, he was a bit too big) but they also need to be big enough to not get thrown around at the line of scrimmage when rushing. (I think Matthews is about 255, ideal.) I think that is what the coaches might answer anyway – but I don’t think 5-6 pounds will make THAT big of a difference in Chillar’s case. He’s fairly tenacious and I think both he and Bishop (who is 238) could be quite disruptive coming from the outside.
August 4, 2010 at 11:37 am |
Thanks awhayes. Appreciate the insight.